Abstract
The disinfection of root canal through minimally invasive access cavity remains questionable. This in vitro study compared the effectiveness of three disinfection measures including conventional irrigation, ultrasonic assisted irrigation, and erbium:yttrium–aluminum-garnet (Er:YAG) laser assisted irrigation through conventionally or minimally invasive access. Sixty-six extracted maxillary first molars were randomly divided into group 1 conventionally invasive access group (CIA) and group 2 computer-guided minimally invasive access group (MIA). Each group was further randomly divided into three subgroups, (A) conventional irrigation (CI), (B) passive ultrasonic agitation (PUI), and (C) Er:YAG laser activated irrigation (LAI). Enterococcus faecalis (E. faecalis) infection model was established inside all root canals after instrumentation was performed up to ProTaper Universal F2. After various disinfection methods, microbial samples were collected from root canals by paper tip method and cultured, and colony forming units (CFU) values of each sample were calculated. Then the root canals were enlarged to the size of F3, after which dentin debris was collected from the F3 file. After dilution and culturing, the CFU value was calculated for each group. Two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed to test the interaction. The results revealed a significant antagonism (F = 3.394, P = 0.043). The bacterial CFU counts of group B and group C were significantly less than that of group A (P < 0.05), and there was no significant difference between group B and C (P > 0.05). Additionally, group 2A was better than group 1A (P < 0.05); there was no significant difference between group 1B and group 2B, group 1C and group 2C (P > 0.05). Comparison of the bacterial CFU counts in dentin debris after disinfection, the results revealed a significant antagonism (F = 7.224, P = 0.002), and group C had the least. The disinfection effect of Er:YAG laser or ultrasonic assisted computer-guided minimally invasive access is similar to conventionally invasive access, and Er:YAG laser is better than ultrasonic in removing bacteria from dentinal tubules and is easy to operate, which is more suitable for minimally invasive root canal treatment.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Waltimo T, Trope M, Haapasalo M, Ørstavik D (2005) Clinical efficacy of treatment procedures in endodontic infection control and one year follow-up of periapical healing. Journal of endodontics 31(12):863–866. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.don.0000164856.27920.85
Zandi H, Petronijevic N, Mdala I, Kristoffersen A, Enersen M, Rôças I, Siqueira J, Ørstavik D (2019) Outcome of endodontic retreatment using 2 root canal irrigants and influence of infection on healing as determined by a molecular method: a randomized clinical trial. Journal of endodontics 45(9):1089-1098.e1085. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2019.05.021
Yahata Y, Masuda Y, Komabayashi T (2017) Comparison of apical centring ability between incisal-shifted access and traditional lingual access for maxillary anterior teeth. Australian endodontic journal the journal of the Australian Society of Endodontology Inc 43(3):123–128
Allen C, Meyer C, Yoo E, Vargas J, Liu Y, Jalali P (2018) Stress distribution in a tooth treated through minimally invasive access compared to one treated through traditional access: a finite element analysis study. J conserv dent: JCD 21(5):505–509. https://doi.org/10.4103/JCD.JCD_260_18
Li Z, Wang L, Zhu X, Niu C, Huang Z, Sun H (2020) [Evaluation on the fracture resistance of dental tissues after guided plate-mediated precision minimally invasive root canal treatment]. Shanghai kou qiang yi xue = Shanghai journal of stomatology 29(5):487–491. https://doi.org/10.19439/j.sjos.2020.05.008
Krishan R, Paqué F, Ossareh A, Kishen A, Dao T, Friedman S (2014) Impacts of conservative endodontic cavity on root canal instrumentation efficacy and resistance to fracture assessed in incisors, premolars, and molars. Journal of endodontics 40(8):1160–1166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2013.12.012
Vieira G, Pérez A, Alves F, Provenzano J, Mdala I, Siqueira J, Rôças I (2020) Impact of contracted endodontic cavities on root canal disinfection and shaping. Journal of endodontics 46(5):655–661. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2020.02.002
Neelakantan P, Khan K, Hei Ng G, Yip C, Zhang C, Pan Cheung G (2018) Does the orifice-directed dentin conservation access design debride pulp chamber and mesial root canal systems of mandibular molars similar to a traditional access design? Journal of endodontics 44(2):274–279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2017.10.010
Neelakantan P, Cheng C, Mohanraj R, Sriraman P, Subbarao C, Sharma S (2015) Antibiofilm activity of three irrigation protocols activated by ultrasonic, diode laser or Er:YAG laser in vitro. Int Endod J 48(6):602–610. https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.12354
Guidotti R, Merigo E, Fornaini C, Rocca J, Medioni E, Vescovi P (2014) Er:YAG 2,940-nm laser fiber in endodontic treatment: a help in removing smear layer. Lasers Med Sci 29(1):69–75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10103-012-1217-x
Lee B, Jeng J, Lin C, Shoji S, Lan W (2004) Thermal effect and morphological changes induced by Er:YAG laser with two kinds of fiber tips to enlarge the root canals. Photomed Laser Surg 22(3):191–197. https://doi.org/10.1089/1549541041438704
Watanabe S, Saegusa H, Anjo T, Ebihara A, Kobayashi C, Suda H (2010) Dentin strain induced by laser irradiation. Australian endodontic journal : the journal of the Australian Society of Endodontology Inc 36(2):74–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-4477.2009.00194.x
Afkhami F, Ahmadi P, Chiniforush N, Sooratgar A (2021) Effect of different activations of silver nanoparticle irrigants on the elimination of Enterococcus faecalis. Clin Oral Invest 25(12):6893–6899. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-021-03979-5
Swimberghe R, De Clercq A, De Moor R, Meire M (2019) Efficacy of sonically, ultrasonically and laser-activated irrigation in removing a biofilm-mimicking hydrogel from an isthmus model. Int Endod J 52(4):515–523. https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.13024
Korkut E, Torlak E, Gezgin O, Özer H, Şener Y (2018) Antibacterial and smear layer removal efficacy of Er:YAG laser irradiation by photon-induced photoacoustic streaming in primary molar root canals: a preliminary study. Photomed Laser Surg 36(9):480–486. https://doi.org/10.1089/pho.2017.4369
L W M vdS, (2007) Passive ultrasonic irrigation of the root canal: a review of the literature. Int Endod J 40(6):415–426. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2007.01243.x
Jiang LM, Verhaagen B, Versluis M, Langedijk J, Wesselink P, Sluis LWMVD (2011) The influence of the ultrasonic intensity on the cleaning efficacy of passive ultrasonic irrigation. J Endod 37(5):688–692. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2011.02.004
Bryce G, MacBeth N, Gulabivala K, Ng Y (2018) The efficacy of supplementary sonic irrigation using the EndoActivator system determined by removal of a collagen film from an ex vivo model. Int Endod J 51(4):489–497. https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.12870
Goerig A, Michelich R, Schultz H (1982) Instrumentation of root canals in molar using the step-down technique. Journal of endodontics 8(12):550–554. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0099-2399(82)80015-0
Patel S, Rhodes J (2007) A practical guide to endodontic access cavity preparation in molar teeth. Br Dent J 203(3):133–140. https://doi.org/10.1038/bdj.2007.682
Galler K, Grubmüller V, Schlichting R, Widbiller M, Eidt A, Schuller C, Wölflick M, Hiller K, Buchalla W (2019) Penetration depth of irrigants into root dentine after sonic, ultrasonic and photoacoustic activation. Int Endod J 52(8):1210–1217. https://doi.org/10.1111/iej.13108
Sundqvist G, Figdor D, Persson S, Sjögren U (1998) Microbiologic analysis of teeth with failed endodontic treatment and the outcome of conservative re-treatment. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 85(1):86–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1079-2104(98)90404-8
Karim IE, Kennedy J, Hussey D (2007) The antimicrobial effects of root canal irrigation and medication. Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology, and Endodontology 103(4):560–569. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tripleo.2006.10.004
Koch J, Jaramillo D, DiVito E, Peters O (2016) Irrigant flow during photon-induced photoacoustic streaming (PIPS) using particle image velocimetry (PIV). Clin Oral Invest 20(2):381–386. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-015-1562-9
Bormashenko E (2019) Moses effect: physics and applications. Adv Coll Interface Sci 269:1–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cis.2019.04.003
Paiva S, Siqueira JF, R??As IN, Carmo FL, Ferreira DC, Curvelo J, Soares R, Rosado AS (2012) Supplementing the antimicrobial effects of chemomechanical debridement with either passive ultrasonic irrigation or a final rinse with chlorhexidine: a clinical study. Journal of Endodontics 38(9):1202-1206 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joen.2012.06.023
Mozo S, Llena C, Forner L (2012) Review of ultrasonic irrigation in endodontics: increasing action of irrigating solutions. Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal 17(3):e512-516. https://doi.org/10.4317/medoral.17621
Saghiri MA, Asgar K, Gutmann JL, Garcia-Godoy F, Asatorian A (2012) Effect of laser irradiation on root canal walls after final irrigation with 17% EDTA or BioPure MTAD: X-ray diffraction and SEM analysis. Quintessence Int 43(10):e127
Olivi G, DiVito E, Peters O, Kaitsas V, Angiero F, Signore A, Benedicenti S (2014) Disinfection efficacy of photon-induced photoacoustic streaming on root canals infected with Enterococcus faecalis: an ex vivo study. Journal of the American Dental Association (1939) 145(8):843–848. https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.2014.46
Guo H, Yue L, Gao Y (2011) [Status of bacterial colonization in infected root canal]. Beijing da xue xue bao Yi xue ban = Journal of Peking University Health sciences 43(1):26–28
Meire MA, Coenye T, Nelis HJ, Moor R (2012) Evaluation of Nd:YAG and Er:YAG irradiation, antibacterial photodynamic therapy and sodium hypochlorite treatment on Enterococcus faecalis biofilms. Int Endod J 45(5):482–491. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2591.2011.02000.x
Peeters H, De Moor R (2015) Measurement of pressure changes during laser-activated irrigant by an erbium, chromium: yttrium, scandium, gallium, garnet laser. Lasers Med Sci 30(5):1449–1455. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10103-014-1605-5
Mohammadi Z, Jafarzadeh H, Shalavi S, Palazzi F (2017) Recent advances in root canal disinfection: a review. Iranian endodontic journal 12(4):402–406. https://doi.org/10.22037/iej.v12i4.17935
Funding
This study was funded by Teaching and scientific research project of national medical degree graduate education steering committee B1-YX20180302-03.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Shan, X., Tian, F., Li, J. et al. Comparison of Er:YAG laser and ultrasonic in root canal disinfection under minimally invasive access cavity. Lasers Med Sci 37, 3249–3258 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10103-022-03613-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10103-022-03613-0